2009 Belgian Grand Prix

[Greycap]

The handful of people on the previous pages that nitpick to no end to prove that the move was against the rules despite there apparently being no rule that says one can't take a longer line on a dirtier surface... which, actually, makes perfect sense.

 

[Famine]

The handful of people on the previous pages that nitpick to no end to prove that the move was against the rules despite there apparently being no rule that says one can't take a longer line on a dirtier surface... which, actually, makes perfect sense.

There doesn't need to be such a rule. It's already covered:

The FIA's rules are that the track is everything between the two solid white lines, and that drivers must stay on the track at all times.

Raikonnen left the boundaries of the track and gained position. Under FIA rules - clarified last year and retroactively applied to that race - this isn't permitted.

Now... I don't appear care about whether Button or Barrichello passed anyone anywhere because I didn't see them (I only saw Button being smashed into on my coverage, and Barrichello's action was curiously absent until he was on fire) and they didn't cheat to win the race. However, if they passed for position while not on the track they should face the same punishment as Kimi should be facing and that Hamilton got last year. It has nothing to do with what colour car anyone was driving.

The FIA's rules do not permit driving outside the white lines and clearly state that if doing so gains an advantage it must be ceded immediately.

 

[Greycap]

Now... I don't care about whether Button or Barrichello passed anyone anywhere because I didn't see them (I only saw Button being smashed into on my coverage, and Barrichello's action was curiously absent until he was on fire) and they didn't cheat to win the race.

That's pretty much the problem, it seems to be the result of the action that is more important than the action itself. Nobody cares that Button overtook Sutil outside the white lines because he crashed. Nobody cares that Barrichello sailed past the havoc without even turning in that much because he only got seventh. Nobody cares that Sutil overtook Badoer early in the race using the outside runoff because they didn't get points. But every other person seems to care that Räikkönen won the race by overtaking outside the white lines, something he never even did. He won the race by overtaking Kubica and Fisichella on the track. Yes, he overtook Heidfeld while outside the white lines. Should he have waved Heidfeld past and just calmly look at Kubica vanishing into the distance?

If we're going by strictly by his ranking he went off the track after taking the apex in the 3rd place (behind Fisichella and Heidfeld, very slightly ahead of Trulli and Kubica), and returned in the 3rd place (behind Fisichella and Kubica, very slightly ahead of Heidfeld and Trulli). Heidfeld made a mistake which caused Trulli to go wide, which in turn caused Räikkönen to go even more wide.

I'm beginning to understand why F1 is getting boring. Apparently a guy who misses a braking badly and forces two others wide is the one who deserves to keep his position. By all means, get rid of the tarmac runoffs or at least place styrofoam cubes all over them to prevent fast driving if that's what it takes.

 

[Famine]

That's pretty much the problem, it seems to be the result of the action that is more important than the action itself.

Not so:

However, if they passed for position while not on the track they should face the same punishment as Kimi should be facing and that Hamilton got last year.

Yes, he overtook Heidfeld while outside the white lines. Should he have waved Heidfeld past and just calmly look at Kubica vanishing into the distance?

Yes.

Apparently a guy who misses a braking badly and forces two others wide is the one who deserves to keep his position.

Some races ago now, a driver (I don't recall who) was penalised for braking very late (so probably Hamilton) and forcing the car on the outside of the corner wide.

 

[cicohipe]

Just for further arguments sake. Here is the launch from Raikonen's view.

Now apparently, i can't confirm this, but apparently it was said during the driver briefing they were allowed to take the first corner wide.

If this is true all argument is pointless.



Edit: Listen to DC at the end... ROFL, i didn't get to see this on my telecast.

 

[The Outlaw]

Welcome to 10 post ago

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Direct quote from the decision Re. McLaren VS FIA for the events at the Belgian GP at Spa 2008:

"3. In its decision N° 49 (the “contested decision&#8221, taken on 7 September 2008, the Panel of Stewards considered that Mr Hamilton had not sufficiently ceded back the advantage he had gained by cutting the chicane, and had thus breached Article 30.3.a) of the Formula One Sporting Regulations and article 2.g) of Chapter 4 of Appendix L to the International Sporting Code. On the basis of Article 16.3.a) of the Formula One Sporting Regulations, the Panel imposed a drive-through penalty on Mr Hamilton. Article 30.3.a) of those regulations stipulates that “during practice and the race, drivers may use only the track and must at all times observe the provisions of the Code relating to driving behaviour on circuits”. Article 2.g) of Chapter 4 of Appendix L to the International Sporting Code states that “the race track alone shall be used by the drivers during the race”. As the penalty was to be applied at the end of the race, the Panel of Stewards added 25 seconds to the driver's race time, in accordance with the provisions of Article 16.3, final paragraph."

 

[Alex.]

Is that the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile or the Ferrari Interests Authority your talking about?

Where did you think of that?

 

[cicohipe]

Welcome to 10 post ago

I cant see where anyone has posted a in-car view. One has been taken down, so for anyone new coming into the discussion this makes it easier.


After looking over this more i think it is pretty clear that Kimi should has given the position back or been made to give the position back.

Even if it was stated to the driver's that they can use the run-off that doesn't change the rule book and doesn't mean they can use the run-off to gain an advantage, which it is pretty clear he did.

Although Raikonen potentially avoided an accident, i still see no reason why that give him any right to overtake off the course.

 

[Peter]

Bad example. There was no runoff of any sort there as there is a river just the other side of the wall! Also, hitting the wall didn't kill him. IIRC he slowed the car down from 190ish to 135ish before hitting the wall a glancing blow.

If there was runoff, he could stop the car, and there would have never been any fatal blow from a flying wheel at all.

 

[daan]

If there was runoff, he could stop the car, and there would have never been any fatal blow from a flying wheel at all.

But your argument was for gravel vs tarmac run off. In this example, there was a wall, so any type of runoff (the actual runoff involved was a strip of grass, and then what looks like concrete. Not gravel) wouldn't have made any difference.

 

[the Interceptor]

Greycap, in all seriousness: I expected better of you. I actually expected someone to draw "just because it's Ferrari"-card sooner or later, but I wouldn't have thought it was you.

I have been discussing this incident since I saw it live on tv, long before it was clear that Kimi would win the race. And it doesn't matter to me that he did. I am solely interested in sheding some light on this case, independently of who it was and where on the grid he ended up to be. I have not looked into the faults of others in this race because it was this case that took my attention. But please, if others did the same thing, I demand the same investigation for their wrongdoings.

My point is that I simply do not understand how the FIA can operate by such flexible rules, which they sometimes seem to apply if they want to, and sometimes seem to ignore. I understand that this very incident is not as clearly cut to simply punish Kimi, but I don't see it as a normal starting procedure either.

Maybe I am wrong. The commentators on tv didn't mind. The stewards didn't mind. The other teams didn't mind. So maybe, this just isn't worth to the thought of any more, I don't know. I personally however think that this should be investigated, and as it seems, I am not the only one. I am the last one demanding to play games straighly by the book, just as I am the last to ask for punishment for a driver because I don't like him or his team. I simply am interested in seeing all drivers treated equally. I don't see that, so I speak up - simple as that.

 

[Greycap]

Greycap, in all seriousness: I expected better of you. I actually expected someone to draw "just because it's Ferrari"-card sooner or later, but I wouldn't have thought it was you.

Someone had to question the unbelievable ranting about Räikkönen doing this and that while Button, Barrichello and Sutil got away unnoticed for doing the same thing. I'm not sure if it's Ferrari that causes it but having seen much of the general attitude towards them on these forums I wouldn't be all that surprised. If it was against the rules the jury would have done something about it, after all they punished Badoer in Valencia of touching the pit exit line. The punishment served no "real" purpose because he was already far behind the others but he broke the rules and got the penalty. They see everything and they obviously take action when it's needed.

As I said, it's probably more the result of the action that is causing the uproar than the action itself. In just about every race in the start there are cars swerving left and right on the opening straight even though it says in the rules that one can change the line once. In just about every race someone dives into the extreme inside or outside and overtakes from there, sometimes with two wheels on the grass and the other two barely touching the white line. No action is taken as long as it's kept even remotely civilized because the start is such a chaos that it's more important to get the train moving than to follow every single rule. Naturally kamikaze moves are looked into - Nürburgring 2009 if my memory serves - but many small things are just whisked off. This wouldn't be nearly as big of a fuss if Ferrari had pulled off their usual '09 tactics and ended up outside the points.

There are several things the jury has probably taken into account when deciding not to take action. Räikkönen clearly slowing down enough and applying full lock to take the corner (and thus losing the possible momentum advantage compared to taking the corner normally), then being pushed wide by Trulli who in turn was pushed wide by Heidfeld who seemingly chose to continue the German traditions of crazy dive bombing. He also had clear traction problems in the run off, as well as the disadvantage of the longer distance. Seeing that it was Heidfeld who caused the entire mess it would seem quite odd to punish others in his favour.

Personally I think the finishing order wouldn't have been any different had Räikkönen returned to the track behind Heidfeld though, he could easily have caught him with KERS after Eau Rouge and done the trick he now made to Fisichella to Kubica after the restart, then caught up with Fisichella during the following laps. Hanging behind Fisichella on those long straights, armed with KERS, probably wouldn't been overly difficult. I have a feeling that a lot of Fisichella's ability to trail Räikkönen came from the slipstream on the straights. The situation reversed and an extra 80 bhp on tap, the pass would have been very likely.

 

[PeterJB]

This might sound slightly obscene but if they weren't allowed to go wide at turn one then the Stewards may have ignored the advantage gained by Raikkonen because he went wide at turn 3 and lost his place to Kubica, taking away a considerable part of the advantage he'd gained .

 

[tibiquera]

I've seen drivers using the run-off areas since the dawn of paved run-offs and this is the first time the issue is raised. What bothers me is that absolutely no insider has raised any issues about it. DC when asked didn't bother about it, Brundle never raised any issues, no teams or drivers, or retired drivers complained about anything, not even Fisichella and the Force India team. The only people complaining are the anti-Ferrari people who are still bitterly angry at the Belgian race last year, when Hamilton was rightfully punished. What I struggle to believe is how those people won't even listen to David Coulthard who said Kimi didn't gain any illegal advantage.

Kubica was alongside him, taking into account that he was on the inside line and Raikonnen was not. At the apex of the corner Kubica was in front of him.

Raikkonen was slightly ahead of Kubica and close to the breaking point he was half a car length ahead. Whether Kubica was on the inside line or not doesn't matter, what matters is the track position and Kimi had it.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I've seen drivers using the run-off areas since the dawn of paved run-offs and this is the first time the issue is raised. What bothers me is that absolutely no insider has raised any issues about it. DC when asked didn't bother about it, Brundle never raised any issues, no teams or drivers, or retired drivers complained about anything, not even Fisichella and the Force India team.

They evidently don't feel it's an issue. Look at the hotlaps of the old A1-Ring in Austria; drivers frequently used the tarmac runoff area on the outide of the first corner to get a better run and no-one had any concerns with it.

At the Surfers' Paradise street circuit, the drivers are permitted to cut through the first chicane on their outlap because the exit drops them ina bad place. For all we know, drivers were told that they could use the run-off at La Source on the first lap without getting a penalty if hings got messy.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

raikonnen went wide not because he put himself in a bad situation but because he had to avoid a driver that did. he was avoiding an accident with little time to react. i see these as 2 different situations.

So a driver trying to take the optimal out-in-out line is "putting himself in a bad situation"? What do you make of Kimi completely ignoring Hamilton on the entrance to Bus Stop and pushing him inside?

From the on-board video, he left the circuit behind Trulli, and re-joined behind him.

Not what I saw here:

Watch the Ferrari's onboard video again. The Toyota is nowhere to be seen after he took off.

You don't even have to believe, they simply don't. They don't give a damn about Button overtaking Sutil at La Source or Barrichello bypassing the crash scene at Les Combes. But they stick to Räikkönen's manoeuvre like 🤬 on a blanket because it's the red car he was driving.

I care for those incidents as much as you care for Finn drivers only. If you can prove they indeed gained an advantage while off track, I'll be right up there demanding their equal punishment. But don't try excusing Raikkonen with the actions of others because he was the first to do it. The whole front pack was able to keep from crashing into each other and all of them were able to stay on the track, all except Raikkonen. There's only so many ways you can spin an excuse out of that.

Not to mention that the nose of the Ferrari was past the nose of the Toyota while both were still on the track

Categorically, unmistakably false.

Trulli was well ahead of Kimi prior to his off field excursion. FACT.

Personally I think the finishing order wouldn't have been any different had Räikkönen returned to the track behind Heidfeld though[...]

The stewards still penalized Hamilton last year, even when Kimi was gonna get passed by Hamilton in the rain anyways; he crashed himself out of points for crying out loud!

I've seen drivers using the run-off areas since the dawn of paved run-offs and this is the first time the issue is raised.

Bus Stop was a run off area (it's paved).

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Direct quote from the decision Re. McLaren VS FIA for the events at the Belgian GP at Spa 2008:

"3. In its decision N° 49 (the “contested decision”), taken on 7 September 2008, the Panel of Stewards considered that Mr Hamilton had not sufficiently ceded back the advantage he had gained by cutting the chicane, and had thus breached Article 30.3.a) of the Formula One Sporting Regulations and article 2.g) of Chapter 4 of Appendix L to the International Sporting Code. On the basis of Article 16.3.a) of the Formula One Sporting Regulations, the Panel imposed a drive-through penalty on Mr Hamilton. Article 30.3.a) of those regulations stipulates that “during practice and the race, drivers may use only the track and must at all times observe the provisions of the Code relating to driving behaviour on circuits”. Article 2.g) of Chapter 4 of Appendix L to the International Sporting Code states that “the race track alone shall be used by the drivers during the race”. As the penalty was to be applied at the end of the race, the Panel of Stewards added 25 seconds to the driver's race time, in accordance with the provisions of Article 16.3, final paragraph."

You forgot the part where it can only apply to drivers fighting for the championship.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Not what I saw here:

Watch the Ferrari's onboard video again. The Toyota is nowhere to be seen after he took off.

Kubica, then. Or maybe Heidfeld; either way, it's one of the BMWs. The point is that Kimi went off and rejoined behind the same car.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

You forgot the part where it can only apply to drivers fighting for the championship.

I would be absolutely sure you were joking were it not for the fact that I've come to expect anything and everything from the FIA.

Kubica, then. Or maybe Heidfeld; either way, it's one of the BMWs. The point is that Kimi went off and rejoined behind the same car.

Neither. Kimi ran out in 4th place and rejoined in 3rd.

 

[tibiquera]

Bus Stop was a run off area (it's paved).

Bus Stop (do they still call Bus Stop after the changes?) is a chicane. When you cut a chicane you take a shortcut and save time, which is why you can't overtake from there.

Using the run-off area you take the longest route, which logically makes you lose time.

That's why if you're on a qualifying lap in Monaco and you cut the chicane you'll have you lap time cancelled. On the other hand, if you use the run-off area your lap won't be cancelled.

A few examples of drivers putting taking all four tires off the track are found here:

Look at 0:10

Here's at 0:55

0:39 here

And finally this one from 1:38 - 1:42

And before anyone says that those videos are all Ferraris with one exception, it's because it's very hard to find onboard videos of other cars. But if you pay attention on the races you'll see that everyone does that.

 

[the Interceptor]

I've seen drivers using the run-off areas since the dawn of paved run-offs and this is the first time the issue is raised. What bothers me is that absolutely no insider has raised any issues about it. DC when asked didn't bother about it, Brundle never raised any issues, no teams or drivers, or retired drivers complained about anything, not even Fisichella and the Force India team. The only people complaining are the anti-Ferrari people who are still bitterly angry at the Belgian race last year, when Hamilton was rightfully punished. What I struggle to believe is how those people won't even listen to David Coulthard who said Kimi didn't gain any illegal advantage.

I have been discussing this incident since I saw it live on tv, long before it was clear that Kimi would win the race. And it doesn't matter to me that he did. I am solely interested in sheding some light on this case, independently of who it was and where on the grid he ended up to be. I have not looked into the faults of others in this race because it was this case that took my attention. But please, if others did the same thing, I demand the same investigation for their wrongdoings.

*snip*

Maybe I am wrong. The commentators on tv didn't mind. The stewards didn't mind. The other teams didn't mind. So maybe, this just isn't worth to the thought of any more, I don't know. I personally however think that this should be investigated, and as it seems, I am not the only one. I am the last one demanding to play games straighly by the book, just as I am the last to ask for punishment for a driver because I don't like him or his team. I simply am interested in seeing all drivers treated equally. I don't see that, so I speak up - simple as that.

Bus Stop (do they still call Bus Stop after the changes?) is a chicane. When you cut a chicane you take a shortcut and save time, which is why you can't overtake from there.

Using the run-off area you take the longest route, which logically makes you lose time.

Not necessarily. Sure, a longer route sounds like lost time. But what if the longer route enables you to keep much more momentum and thus gain a little bit of time? Given that were possible on a specific corner on a specific track, would you claim that to be legal because the actual way is longer?

Also, this case actually is much more simple than what we're discussing here. Famine nailed it before:

Raikonnen left the boundaries of the track and gained position. Under FIA rules - clarified last year and retroactively applied to that race - this isn't permitted.

 

[Peter]

Fisichella doesn't want to argue with Ferrari about the situation, he doesn't want to ruin his chances of taking Badoer's seat.

 

[Alex.]

This is a pointless argument. It's not going to change the result. Seriously guys, bin the Ferrari International Assistance garbage and deal with the result, hmm?

Yes Kimi left the track, Hamilton did it in 07 and it's been done plenty before (some examples shown above.) Kimi technically covered more distance by going off the track anyway and was avoiding potential incidents.

 

[SUPER NUMBBER]

Bus Stop (do they still call Bus Stop after the changes?) is a chicane. When you cut a chicane you take a shortcut and save time, which is why you can't overtake from there.

Using the run-off area you take the longest route, which logically makes you lose time.

Logic would be appreciated here.

Kimi was 4th when he went off track.

He was 3rd when he came back.

Logically...he gained a position off track

Was that so hard to understand???

 

[sejtur]

Logic would be appreciated here.

Kimi was 4th when he went off track.

He was 3rd when he came back.

Logically...he gained a position off track

Was that so hard to understand???

Kimi was a 4th when he came back too...

 

[Famine]

Kimi was a 4th when he came back too...

I can only see Fisichella and Kubica ahead of him. Last I checked, that makes him 3rd.


It's not too much to ask, surely, for fans to want all drivers treated equally?

 

[sejtur]

Ofcourse I want all drivers treated equally.

 

[Famine]

Ahead and moving further ahead...


As Hamilton was penalised last year, so Kimi should be penalised this year - 25s race time penalty equivalent to the drive-through penalty that should have been given, for gaining an advantage by contravening Article 30.3.a) of the Formula One Sporting Regulations.

 

[tibiquera]

Ahead and moving further ahead...


As Hamilton was penalised last year, so Kimi should be penalised this year - 25s race time penalty equivalent to the drive-through penalty that should have been given, for gaining an advantage by contravening Article 30.3.a) of the Formula One Sporting Regulations.

So to summarize, the whole point of the argument is whether the Article 30.3.a applies only to cutting through the chicane or putting all four wheels outside the lines at any point in the track. We all agree that cutting a chicane is illegal and we all remember the cautions Massa got for cutting the chicanes this year at Monaco, because he put his 4 wheels outside the track's limits. So if it applies to run-off areas too we should be quite familiar with drivers having their quali laps canceled, or getting warnings and even penalties during the race for the use of run-off area, right? Well, this isn't the case. I gave video proof a few posts above that several times in many years (including 2009 in Rosberg's video) drivers have put their 4 wheels outside the track and got absolutely no penalty. And we also have David Coulthard's testimony who believed the move from Kimi's part was legal. That is more than sufficient proof to show his move was legal, and therefore suggesting that FIA did what it did just because they wanted to help Ferrari is absolutely unfair.

However, if anyone disagrees with my proofs and who thinks Kimi should've gotten a penalty, please show any video from any point in Formula 1's history where any driver has gotten a warning or penalty for using the run-off area. If that can't be done, then find the opinion of any insider (team principle, driver, ex-driver, FIA member, marshall, etc.) who thinks Kimi should get a penalty. If that can't be done, it becomes clear that the claim has no fundaments.

And for the love of God, for all people out there quoting me... as a sign of courtesy, stop quoting small portions of what I say, taking out of the context, and then basing your points solely on that (and adding editorial comment, because it's something I wish to do many times, but I don't do it because of respect). Read the whole thing and then give an opinion on my whole post. I tend to investigate quite a lot before I say something, so at least pretend you care about it, otherwise the discussion will go nowhere.